NRDC – Organic Authorityhttp://www.organicauthority.com
Organic Authority - organic food, organic living, green living, organic thoughts.Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:16:09 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.5.3Take a Bite Out of Food Waste with the ‘Waste-Free Kitchen Handbook’http://www.organicauthority.com/take-a-bite-out-of-food-waste-with-the-waste-free-kitchen-handbook/
Fri, 23 Sep 2016 09:00:21 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=52421Despite a higher profile in recent years, the issue of food waste remains a massive global problem. According to Feeding America, the United State’s network of food banks, an estimated 25 to 40 percent of food grown, processed, and transported in the U.S. will never be consumed. There are multiple streams of food waste, including […]

Despite a higher profile in recent years, the issue of food waste remains a massive global problem.

According to Feeding America, the United State’s network of food banks, an estimated 25 to 40 percent of food grown, processed, and transported in the U.S. will never be consumed.

There are multiple streams of food waste, including grocery stores, restaurants, other businesses, and home kitchens. Many well-intentioned home cooks want to make a difference but lack the tools to make adequate tools. Enter the “Waste Free Kitchen Handbook: A Guide to Eating Well and Saving Money By Wasting Less Food,” a new handbook for managing food waste in your home. Packed with engaging checklists, simple recipes, practical strategies, and educational infographics, this resource will turn the average home cook into a direct action food activist.

Dana Gunders, the brainchild behind this ultimate organization and how-to tool for eliminating food waste is a scientist by day at the Natural Resources Defense Council. She has compiled an excellent collection of everyday techniques for changing up your kitchen habits. From changing the way you do your food shopping and learning to use a refrigerator properly to simple preservation methods that include freezing, pickling, and using food scraps, this handbook takes the guesswork out of how you can take a bite out of the food waste problem. Many of the techniques aren’t complicated, but they just fall into the realm of knowledge that most Americans haven’t felt required to know since the age of packaged foods came along.

The “Waste Free Kitchen Handbook” qualifies as good to read straight through and as a handy go-to reference. Keep it on the shelf with your cookbooks, so the helpful facts and tips like the 20 “use-it-up” recipes are at your fingertips. It’s arranged into three easy to understand sections that include strategies for everyday life, recipes, and a resource directory featuring various foods from fruits and veggies to meat and dairy.

]]>EPA Revokes Approval of Enlist Duo Weed Killer Due to Butterfly Deathshttp://www.organicauthority.com/epa-revokes-approval-of-enlist-duo-weed-killer-due-to-butterfly-deaths/
Fri, 27 Nov 2015 12:00:09 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=39539The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has decided to revoke its approval of Dow AgroSciences’ product Enlist Duo after determining that the product is “likely significantly more harmful than initially believed,” according to a press release published by the Center for Biological Diversity. Specifically, the chemical appears to be linked to monarch butterfly deaths. The EPA appealed […]

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has decided to revoke its approval of Dow AgroSciences’ product Enlist Duo after determining that the product is “likely significantly more harmful than initially believed,” according to a press release published by the Center for Biological Diversity. Specifically, the chemical appears to be linked to monarch butterfly deaths.

The EPA appealed to the courts last week to reverse its original decision, citing a discovery of new information as the reason behind the change.

When the EPA originally approved Enlist Duo, Dow had argued that the combination of glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) and 4-D was no more toxic than the two chemicals separately. However, when applying for a patent, Dow told the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that the chemical combination would offer “synergistic herbicide weed control,” something that environmental activists had cited as a possible problem when the product was originally approved (including over 200,000 people who signed a petition to ask the company to stop selling the product), NPR reported.

“EPA can no longer be confident that Enlist Duo will not cause risks of concern to nontarget organisms, including those listed as endangered, when used according to the approved label,” the agency said in its filing to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, reports the New York Times. The EPA originally approved the herbicide in November 2014.

Enlist Duo is intended to be used on GMO corn and soybean strains that have been genetically engineered to tolerate it. Glyphosate has also been cited as the chief cause of the decline in monarch butterflies, according to a press release from the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“Removing this dangerous chemical from the market is a key step in protecting sensitive native plants and monarch butterflies, which have been further threatened by its impact on milkweed, the plant they need to survive,” said Sylvia Fallon, Senior Scientist at the NRDC. “We are delighted by this news, but also troubled that the EPA overlooked this information initially.”

In a press release published Wednesday, Dow claimed that Enlist Duo should still reach markets for the 2016 growing season.

]]>EPA Proposes Ban on Common Pesticide Used on Fruits and Vegetableshttp://www.organicauthority.com/epa-proposes-ban-on-common-pesticide-used-on-fruits-and-vegetables/
Mon, 02 Nov 2015 15:36:19 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=38959The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a ban on the agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, a common pesticide used on fruits and vegetables, almonds, and other crops. The agency plans to finalize its rule by the end of 2016. The chemical has been banned from consumer products and household use for the past 15 years, and […]

The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a ban on the agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, a common pesticide used on fruits and vegetables, almonds, and other crops. The agency plans to finalize its rule by the end of 2016.

The chemical has been banned from consumer products and household use for the past 15 years, and in 2006, the EPA limited the number of crops on which it can be applied. Environmentalists have since petitioned the agency to ban all uses of the chemical.

“We’ve known for years that chlorpyrifos is dangerous and that’s why we sued EPA,” Veena Singla, a health program scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, told the Los Angeles Times. “The agency’s announcement is a huge step in the right direction, but we think there’s enough evidence to ban all its uses now.”

Since the 2000 ban, nearly 3,000 studies have been published on the health hazards of chlorpyrifos exposure. The latest study, published by Elsevier B.V. in September, found that children exposed to chlorpyrifos in the womb suffered from tremors in both arms that affected their ability to draw, and could later affect their ability to write.

Chlorpyrifos affects the nervous system of people, pets, and other animals the same way it affects the targeted pests, according to the National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC). The chemical binds to enzymes that control the messages that travel between nerve cells, and if the body can’t keep up with replacing the depleted enzymes, nerves and muscles are unable to function properly.

The NPIC maintains that children may be more sensitive to pesticides than adults, and nerve damage in children has been observed to be more severe in studies thus far.

More than 5 million pounds of the chemical is used in the U.S. every year.

]]>New Report Finds 14 of 25 Popular Fast Food Restaurants Scored an ‘F’ on Antibiotic Policieshttp://www.organicauthority.com/new-report-finds-14-of-25-popular-fast-food-restaurants-scored-an-f-on-antibiotic-policies/
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 11:00:15 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=38073A new report published by Friends of the Earth and the Natural Resources Defense Council rated the top 25 fast food restaurants and “fast casual” restaurants on their antibiotic policies. In all, 14 restaurants scored zero points out of 36 and received an F grade, reports CNN. The report found that most fast food restaurants […]

A new report published by Friends of the Earth and the Natural Resources Defense Council rated the top 25 fast food restaurants and “fast casual” restaurants on their antibiotic policies. In all, 14 restaurants scored zero points out of 36 and received an F grade, reports CNN.

The report found that most fast food restaurants do not source from suppliers that limit the use of antibiotics in livestock. Chipotle and Panera Bread were the only two restaurants that scored an A on the report card, while Chick-fil-A scored a B. Dunkin’ Donuts and McDonald’s both scored Cs and Wendy’s, Burger King, Starbucks, Subway, Taco Bell, and Applebee’s, among many others, scored Fs.

According to the report, “70-80 percent of antibiotics sold in the U.S. are used in factory farms. This practice enables crowded, filthy conditions for animals and drives antibiotic resistance that threatens our health.” The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has called antibiotic resistance a national public health threat: Each year, 2 million people become infected with antibiotic resistant infections and 23,000 die from them.

“When livestock producers administer antibiotics routinely to their flocks and herds, bacteria can develop resistance, thrive and even spread to our communities, contributing to the larger problem of antibiotic resistance,” the authors wrote in the report, which was released Tuesday. “The worsening epidemic of resistance means that antibiotics may not work when we need them most: when our kids contract a staph infection (MRSA), or our parents get a life-threatening pneumonia.”

Fast food restaurants like Panera Bread, which scored well on the report card, have responded to the threat. The chain bakery uses antibiotic-free ham, turkey, and chicken. Even McDonald’s, which scored a C, has started to take steps toward removing antibiotics. The mega-chain announced in March that it’s committed to serving chicken raised without the use of medically important antibiotics, and will cut antibiotics in chicken from U.S. supply chains within the next two years.

]]>9 Groups Petition FDA to Get Perchlorate and Perfluorocarboxylates Out of Your Pizza Boxeshttp://www.organicauthority.com/9-groups-petition-fda-to-get-perchlorate-and-perfluorocarboxylates-out-of-your-pizza-boxes/
Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:00:58 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=31998Two types of chemicals, perchlorate and perfluorocarboxylates, common in certain food packaging products like pizza boxes and sealing gaskets, are at the center of a petition to the Food and Drug Administration submitted by nine consumer and environmental advocacy groups. The groups: the Natural Resources Defense Council, Breast Cancer Fund, Center for Environmental Health, Center […]

Two types of chemicals, perchlorate and perfluorocarboxylates, common in certain food packaging products like pizza boxes and sealing gaskets, are at the center of a petition to the Food and Drug Administration submitted by nine consumer and environmental advocacy groups.

The groups: the Natural Resources Defense Council, Breast Cancer Fund, Center for Environmental Health, Center for Food Safety, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Children’s Environmental Health Network, Clean Water Action, Environmental Working Group, and Improving Kids’ Environment, are asking the FDA to ban perchlorate and perfluorocarboxylates from food packaging because of serious risks to human health.

According to Food Safety News, “These chemicals have the potential to harm fetal development, male reproductive systems, pre- and post-natal brain development and cause cancer, stated the petition signatories.”

The NRDC claims it received flawed FDA data on perchlorate through a Freedom of Information Act request. “The petitioners cited an FDA study from 2008 which found that 59 percent of more than 1,000 food samples had detectable levels of perchlorate and that children younger than six had the greatest average exposure,” reports Food Safety News.

And, explains Food Safety News, the group noted that the EPA’s Science Advisory board “believes that infants are likely to be disproportionately impacted by perchlorate because their brains are still developing.”

The groups identified 10 studies published between 2009 and 2014 that also supported the FDA’s own research that found “significant gaps” in understanding the potential risks to human health from exposure to these chemicals.

And while U.S. based production of food packaging is generally free from perchlorate and perfluorocarboxylates, per FDA’s guidelines, these chemicals can be used in products that are manufactured in other countries, and the petition suggests these imported products pose serious threats to human health.

]]>Full Ban on Chlorpyrifos Pesticide Subject of Lawsuit Against the EPAhttp://www.organicauthority.com/full-ban-on-chlorpyrifos-pesticide-subject-of-lawsuit-against-the-epa/
Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:00:25 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=31547The Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) along with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency over chlorpyrifos, what the groups claim is a toxic pesticide that can disrupt development in fetuses and small children. Chlorpyrifos is an insecticide widely used in agriculture—about 10 million pounds worth annually are […]

The Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) along with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency over chlorpyrifos, what the groups claim is a toxic pesticide that can disrupt development in fetuses and small children.

Chlorpyrifos is an insecticide widely used in agriculture—about 10 million pounds worth annually are applied to food crops. It’s commonly applied to corn, grapes, oranges and almonds, as well as used on golf courses and in other public areas, with one-fifth of its total application occurring in California. It was also widely used in household applications as well, but in 2000 the agency banned it from household products with the exceptions of ant and roach baits.

PANNA and NRDC filed a petition with the EPA back in 2007 to ban chlorpyrifos from all uses. The groups hope the lawsuit will result in a total ban of the pesticide. The groups also want the EPA to release its updated human health risk assessment on chlorpyrifos and make it available for public comment in December, “along with either a proposed revocation rule or a proposed denial of the petition,” explains Food Safety News. In addition to the risks to fetuses and children, the groups say chlorpyrifos is a toxic pesticide that can cause nausea, dizziness and confusion. At very high exposures, it has also been connected with respiratory paralysis and death.

“EPA’s failure to make a final decision on the 2007 Petition leaves children at risk of harm from chlorpyrifos exposure and leaves PANNA without legal remedies to challenge EPA’s ongoing failure to take necessary steps to protect children,” the groups wrote in the complaint filed earlier this month.

But the California Farm Bureau Federation has opposed a ban, and according to SF Gate, the bureau stated that “EPA’s own studies have shown the pesticide can be applied safely.”

]]>300 Pages of Foster Farms Noncompliance Reports Show Violations ‘Every Other Day’http://www.organicauthority.com/300-pages-of-foster-farms-noncompliance-reports-show-violations-every-other-day/
Mon, 15 Sep 2014 17:31:26 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=31348The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has released five years worth of USDA noncompliance reports filed about violations at all of Foster Farms facilities. In total, the organization released 300 pages of noncompliance reports –100 of which were issued just in 2014. The NRDC was able to obtain the detailed reports through the Freedom of […]

The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has released five years worth of USDA noncompliance reports filed about violations at all of Foster Farms facilities.

In total, the organization released 300 pages of noncompliance reports –100 of which were issued just in 2014. The NRDC was able to obtain the detailed reports through the Freedom of Information Act.

“[W]ith Foster Farms being under the government’s microscope since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) blamed it for the much-publicized outbreak of drug-resistant Salmonella, the story told by the data is surprising,” reports Food Safety News, “the two Foster Farms plants in California which CDC linked to the antibiotic-resistant Salmonella outbreak have racked up 200 separate violations during the period.”

The NRDC has been using the salmonella outbreak traced back to Foster Farms along with the violations in efforts to pressure the company to revisit its antibiotic use and limit it to therapeutic dosages rather than for growth enhancement. For more than a year—between March 2013 to July 2014—a drug-resistant salmonella outbreak was linked to Foster Farms’ California facilities. It sickened more than 600 people, with close to 40 percent requiring hospitalization.

In a statement, the NRDC noted “the pattern of violations at Foster Farm plants doesn’t leave us feeling warm and fuzzy about the company’s commitment to protecting public health.” The group said that a violation was occurring once every other day between October 2013 and March 2014.

According to the noncompliance reports obtained by the NRDC, Foster Farms facilities’ violations included “mold growth, cockroaches, an instance of pooling caused by a skin-clogged floor drain, fecal matter and ‘Unidentified Foreign Material’ (which has it own acronym, UFM) on chicken carcasses, failure to implement required tests and sampling, metal pieces found in carcasses, and many more.”

“We would have expected that improved sanitation would be a top priority at Foster Farms at the height of the Salmonella outbreak, yet its slaughter and processing plant in Livingston, CA, was cited 154 times in the weeks and months after October 7, 2013, when USDA issued a public health alert about Foster Farms chicken,” said the NRDC. “NRDC will continue to press for meaningful oversight of livestock antibiotics by the Food and Drug Administration,” the group said, with petitions submitted to U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its July decision, split 2-to-1, that “allows FDA to continue to refuse to withdraw approvals of livestock antibiotics despite the agency’s finding that these uses threaten the effectiveness of essential human medicines.“

]]>Antibiotics in Animal Feed Allowed to Continue, Rules Appeals Courthttp://www.organicauthority.com/antibiotics-in-animal-feed-allowed-to-continue-rules-appeals-court/
Tue, 29 Jul 2014 08:00:22 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/?p=30544The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the FDA does not have to ban farms from putting antibiotics in animal feed for reasons other than treating illnesses. Used to rapidly increase weight, putting antibiotics in animal feed is a common and highly controversial practice because of the rise in widespread antibiotic-resistant “superbug” […]

The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the FDA does not have to ban farms from putting antibiotics in animal feed for reasons other than treating illnesses.

Used to rapidly increase weight, putting antibiotics in animal feed is a common and highly controversial practice because of the rise in widespread antibiotic-resistant “superbug” infections.

“Today, 80 percent of all the antibiotics sold in the United States are used in livestock production – not humans,” NRDC said in a statement. “Since FDA first recognized the risks of giving low doses of antibiotics in animal feed day after day, nearly four decades ago, the science on the risks of such use has only gotten stronger.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at least 23,000 Americans will die this year from drug resistant infections. The CDC says there is“strong scientific evidence of a link between antibiotic use in food animals and antibiotic resistance in humans,” and warns of “potentially catastrophic consequences” if we don’t take steps to slow antibiotic use.

The White House recently announced that it would be appointing an advisory committee to address the issue between antibiotics in animal feed and antibiotic-resistant infections. But that wasn’t enough for the court that overturned two district court rulings in cases brought about by environmental groups including the Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Food Animal Concerns Trust, Public Citizen and Union of Concerned Scientists. The groups insist that giving antibiotics to healthy animals is an unsafe and potentially harmful practice.

“As previous court rulings made clear, FDA has failed to follow its own scientific evidence and stop this practice. Unfortunately, today’s Appeals Court decision effectively gives FDA a free pass to ignore the science when it is politically inconvenient,” said Jen Sorenson, NRDC attorney. “We will evaluate all our legal options, and we will continue to push to end the dangerous and unnecessary use of antibiotics on animals that are not sick through every avenue available to us.”

]]>Misleading Expiration Labels Contribute To Food Wastehttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/misleading-expiration-labels-contribute-food-waste/
Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:06:31 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=12014Just days ago we learned that food waste is the third biggest source of climate changing C02 emissions. Now, a report from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) points to misleading expiration date labels as one reason why so much edible food ends up in the landfill. A whopping 40 percent of the food produced in […]

Just days ago we learned that food waste is the third biggest source of climate changing C02 emissions. Now, a report from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) points to misleading expiration date labels as one reason why so much edible food ends up in the landfill.

A whopping 40 percent of the food produced in America never gets eaten because of a couple of tiny numbers printed on the packaging. To most people, a food’s expiration date, often printed next to the words “best if used by,” is law: just one day past the stated date and the entire thing goes in the trash. According to the NRDC report, however, these dates have absolutely nothing to do with food safety.

“The FDA, in its own words, leaves date labels on food, except for infant formula, to ‘the discretion of the manufacturer,’ ” writes Peter Lehner for the NRDC Switchboard blog. “The USDA, which oversees meat, poultry, and some egg products, also says date labels are voluntary.”

“According to the federal government, a date can be there, or not be there; and if it is there, the manufacturer can decide what it means without any further explanation for consumers,” Lehner continues.

Unfortunately, no one has explained this to the average consumer. So a majority of American families toss perfectly edible food into the trash can, thinking they’re avoiding a bout of food poisoning, when in fact they’re just poisoning the planet with food waste.

“People should focus more on how they store food and less on how soon it should be used, Ted Labuza, professor of Food Science and Engineering at the University of Minnesota, told reporters on a press call. It isn’t true that past-date food is always unsafe to consume and, likewise, pre-date food isn’t always safe to consume.”

The NRDC recommends an immediate overhaul of the food expiration label system to stem the tide of unnecessary food waste. “Manufacturers and retailers should have their own, coded system for sharing information relevant to food display and shelf life, rather than a ‘sell by’ date that confuses consumers.”

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) honors remarkable individuals for their contributions to creating healthier and more sustainable food systems through their annual Growing Green Awards. This year’s winners are tackling antibiotic resistance on farms, infusing urban areas with fresh produce in corner stores, championing business innovation in organic agriculture, and empowering communities with sustainable food equity projects.

“America’s highly productive food system is often a disaster for health, communities and our environment,” said Jonathan Kaplan, director of NRDC’s Food and Agriculture Program. “But these entrepreneurs show us that we can defy the gravity of the conventional food industry and innovate smarter, healthier, and more equitable ways to produce food.”

Known as the “Pope of Pork,” Russ Kremer is a fifth-generation pig farmer and a driving force in the movement for more sustainably-raised, antibiotic-free livestock. Kremer contracted an antibiotic-resistant bacterial infection from his pigs in 1989 and nearly died, causing him to realize firsthand the dangers of conventional pork production methods. He immediately made changes to his operation, deciding to start over from scratch and raise pigs the natural, old-fashioned way—as free-roaming, pasture-raised creatures and most importantly, without drugs.

“I share this NRDC honor with farmers who have had the courage to buck dangerous conventional production trends by transforming their raising operations into models of hope,” said Kremer. “These producers are living proof that we can grow profitable and sustainable food production systems that put health first and preserve the efficacy of life-saving medicine, while also treating animals humanely.”

Kremer leads the Ozark Mountain Pork Cooperative, helping other small producers make similar sustainable conversions and profitably raise healthy pigs without antibiotics. The co-op has relationships with major buyers including Whole Foods, Chipotle, Costco and La Quercia.

At only 30 years-old, Brianna Almaguer Sandoval has brought healthy foods into low-resourced communities through hundreds of Philadelphia-area corner stores. As leader of The Food Trust’s Healthy Corner Store Initiative, Sandoval supports corner stores with education, tools, and finances they need to bring in more healthy fruits and vegetables. The program has grwon from 11 stores to become the nation’s largest initiative of its kind with more than 680 stores in Philadelphia, Camden, NJ and Norristown, PA.

“Everyone has a right to healthy food, regardless of where they live or how much money they have,” said Almaguer Sandoval. “Greater access to healthy food, especially for children in urban areas, translates as life-changing health outcomes. This work is just the beginning of an exciting future for corner stores and public health.”

In 2003, the city of Los Angeles threatened to bulldoze the U.S.’s largest community food garden. Local leader Tezozomoc rallied the 350 families who grew food to feed themselves from the 14-acre South Central Garden, engaging in one of our nation’s most important battles for urban agricultural land use. Although the garden was ultimately shut down, it was reborn through Tezozomoc’s efforts into a now-thriving 85-acre, 100% organic cooperative farm in Buttonwillow, California, and the South Central Farmers Health and Educational Fund (SCFHEF).

“By creating new economic opportunities right in our own backyard, we hope to strengthen communities’ ability to grow and eat healthy food as well as reconnect to the priceless cultural heritage behind it,” said Tezozomoc. “Community-based agriculture can prosper if equity is the guiding principle. That equity means having access to healthy food, good jobs and working conditions, and land ownership and resources.”

California farmer and entrepreneur Larry Jacobs has been a pioneer in organic food production that proves thatwe can grow profitable food without chemicals for more than 30 years. After a dangerous personal encounter with pesticides in his early twenties, Jacobs made it his life’s work to support organic farming and introduce innovative non-toxic pest control approaches. He founded the California-based Jacobs Farm, the nation’s largest producer of fresh organic herbs and built the Del Cabo Co-operative, a partnership supporting organic growing in Baja, Mexico. He also played an important role in setting a legal precedent that protects organic farmers from drifting pesticides.

“With this Growing Green Award, we hope to encourage other businesses, farmers and innovators to join us in growing healthy food, in a healthier way,” said Jacobs. “We can’t think of anything more important and fulfilling than finding ways to grow good, toxic-free food without poisoning ourselves and the planet.”

]]>EPA Restricts Use of Potato Fungicide, Dismisses Petition for All-Out Banhttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/epa-restricts-use-of-potato-fungicide-dismisses-petition-for-all-out-ban/
Sat, 28 Jul 2012 08:23:38 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=11133Last week, the EPA announced new regulations on use of the fungicide, chlorpyrifos, a known toxin commonly used on potato crops. The new ruling will lower the allowable applications and the restrictions will be on product labels later this year, the agency reports in a statement released on the EPA website. The new restrictions come in […]

Last week, the EPA announced new regulations on use of the fungicide, chlorpyrifos, a known toxin commonly used on potato crops. The new ruling will lower the allowable applications and the restrictions will be on product labels later this year, the agency reports in a statement released on the EPA website.

The new restrictions come in part as a result of a petition filed by the Pesticide Action Network and the Natural Resources Defense Council. The petition asked the EPA to “revoke all tolerances and cancel all registrations of chlorpyrifos.” The EPA says that while none of the six claims warrants revoking the product fully, it has set new limits, which the agency says will decrease the health risks associated with chlorpyrifos.

Drifting pesticides including chlorpyrifos are creating serious health problems throughout central Minnesota, reports The Huffington Post. Continual low-dose exposure and random heavy doses of serious toxins are being detected in farming communities across the region.

According to the article:

From 2006 to 2009, in an effort to detect pesticides in the air they breathed, residents of central Minnesota set up air monitors on everything from back patios to school rooftops. One or more pesticides were found in 64 percent of 340 samples taken by the so-called drift catchers, according to results published by the nonprofit Pesticide Action Network in May. The most commonly detected chemical was a potato fungicide, chlorothalonil, which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency classifies as a ‘probable’ carcinogen and ‘highly toxic’ if inhaled.

Rates of allergy and asthma are on the rise throughout the potato-growing region, and many of the pesticides are known carcinogens.

]]>Organic Food Legend: Organic Valley’s CEO George Siemonhttp://www.organicauthority.com/foodie-buzz/organic-food-organic-valley-ceo-george-siemon-interview.html
Mon, 25 Jun 2012 07:02:41 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/s1-foodie-buzz/c4-foodie-buzz/organic-food-organic-valley-ceo-george-siemon-interview/Since 1988, Organic Valley has transformed American farmland by helping to create a demand for organic food including dairy, eggs and meat products from small-scale, family-sized farms. A lifelong farmer and organic advocate, George Siemon founded Organic Valley using his unique combination of having one hand in the soil while seeing the big picture. This […]

Since 1988, Organic Valley has transformed American farmland by helping to create a demand for organic food including dairy, eggs and meat products from small-scale, family-sized farms. A lifelong farmer and organic advocate, George Siemon founded Organic Valley using his unique combination of having one hand in the soil while seeing the big picture. This has helped propel the more than 1,700 family-owned farmers now part of the Organic Valley co-operative into leading the campaign to establish effective national standards for organic certification, and transforming the organic food industry. We caught up with George on the heels of winning the Natural Resources Defense Council’s (NRDC) 4th annual “Growing Green Award,” given for his efforts in making our food system healthier and more sustainable.

Laura Klein:How does it feel to win the NRDC’s 2012 Growing Green Award?

George Siemon: It was highly rewarding because it wasn’t just about us winning; it was about them [the NRDC] recognizing the importance of food, and it is really exciting to see how excited they are about organic farming and the whole sector of food. Certainly Organic Valley is a pretty amazing story and deserved it, but I am just one part of the wheel.

LK: What inspired you to become an organic farmer? Why not just go conventional like the majority of America?

GS: I was a back-to-the-lander in the ’70s. I was a naturalist, a boy scout, bird watcher. It was just natural once I found out about organic farming. It’s so much more in tune with my roots and so I said “heck yeah that is who I am.”

LK: How does changing what America eats change the way our food system works?

GS: We’ve allowed ourselves to get into this diet that is so dominated by a couple of commodities [corn and soy]. It’s a huge change, and if you can, imagine what it would be like if we had a really diverisified diet instead. Isn’t that what we’re working towards? Agriculture defines food choices and it’s why organic has done so well. Our conventional food system today is a broken one that favors the chemical industry, so that’s why organic is such an important choice.

GS: Organic food prevents all the risks that are out there. If chemicals have a risk, you’re avoiding that by eating organic food. Organic food is a production act, and can’t really make a safety claim; we live in an impure world after all, but on a precautionary principle, yes, it’s a safer food. And it’s definitely a healthier food.

LK: What does sustainability mean to Organic Valley?

GS: Well, it’s our core mission. It’s more than some maintenance thing. It’s a philosophy that’s prospering and blossoming, and getting better with continued improvement all of the time. It always has to be more positive and more than just hanging on; it’s got to be getting better all the time.

LK: Part of Organic Valley’s mission is to save family farms across the country through organic agriculture. How do you inspire conventional family farms to convert to organic farming and join the co-op?

GS: It’s a constant work of outreach. We put a lot of education out there. Our biggest emissaries are the neighbors—someone who has already converted their land that’s often the biggest spokesperson for organic. There are a lot of ways a farmer can come to organic, but we have to have the resources to be able to back them up and help with the process because they’re not just transitioning their crops, they’re transitioning the way they treat their animals, and that’s a really big deal.

LK: Why is animal welfare a top priority for OV?

GS: It is, naturally. It is also a top priority for the consumer. Even before we had standards, organic farmers had a foundation that the more they care for the soil, the more they care for the animals. We have developed our own internal standards and our own audits.

LK: Is organic worth the extra money?

GS: I’m very prejudiced, of course, so the answer is yes, but it’s yes for good reason. It’s yes because of the quality of the food; it’s yes because of the potential health benefits; it’s yes because of avoiding the environmental issues that surround chemical culture. There are so many angles to it. The big debate though: Is it safer and more nutritious? We can debate that stuff all day long, there are studies on both sides. It’s really a lifestyle choice.

LK: Is the development of GMOs (genetically modified organisms), food and biotechnology a safe road for America and countries in Africa to go down?

GS: Genetically manipulated food is a simple profit-making venture, and giving over the ownership of our seeds to corporations is a very big threat to sustainability. Biotech has only delivered crops that need more chemicals. It only serves the chemical seed industry. At the end of the day, if we really want to breed for nutrition, let’s put some effort into it. Natural breeding gets excellent results. But they’re not really doing that. The money is in the chemicals. It is all rhetoric to promote corporate grip and control, not about feeding the developing world.

LK: How do you deal with a conventional farm next to an organic farm and crop drift?

GS: We’ve always been as friendly as we can be. Those farms are our future organic farmers. Our co-op is dependent on interacting with conventional agriculture. The more and more that I see children being born with lifelong health issues because of chemicals, the more I have to say that it’s different, that child didn’t have a choice. That’s a pretty serious responsibility. That combined with how much it is serving the corporate interests makes it much harder for me to talk about choice. We’re all getting duped by the chemical and biotechnology companies.

GS: The big thing we’re doing is supporting the Right To Know petition and petitioning the FDA to label genetically modified foods. Basically the logic is simple: biotechnology is here, it’s not going away. Can you at least label it so people can make a choice? There is just too much money and influence involved for it to be a fair conversation. Which makes me really proud of the Right to Know movement. Yes, it may not succeed, but it has certainly woken people up. Why shouldn’t a consumer know what’s going on?

LK: Why did you launch “Grassmilk?” (And what’s the difference between milk that comes from cows that eat grass vs. corn, soybeans or other supplemental grains commonly fed to dairy and beef cattle?)

GS: The cows are fed no grains whatsoever. We make sure that our farmers take care of each animal so they can produce enough milk. We have a program to help the producers take care of their animals and produce a milk the consumers want as well. There has been a real anti-corn and soybean movement from the consumer, and so we are responding to the consumer. We want to make sure we aren’t doing anything that isn’t healthy for the animals.

LK: Conventional medicine tells us to stay away from trans fats. Why should we care about having CLA (conjugated linoleic acid) in our diet?

GS: The bottom line is that as we’ve gone toward industrial agriculture, we’ve lost some of these important elements and understandings about health–and particularly fats– like how to balance the omega 6s to 3s. We are constantly striving to produce quality products that have them and help our customers understand the benefits.

LK: Thanks, George! So great chatting with you! Is there anything else you can share with our readers about yourself or Organic Valley?

GS: Thank you! I guess the big thing about the organic lifestyle is that it is much bigger than food. I was just in Europe and they have a movement over there called “post materialist.” I smiled about it, because we certainly have taken it to the max–this artificial lifestyle we’ve been driven to through advertising and all that. But there is a big awakening happening out there. There are more gardens than ever. We are seeing a quiet but real movement here, and organic foods is proving to be a real mainstay in that. And being an organic co-op, we are eager to be a part of that. We’re in it for the long haul.

]]>What Is The FDA NOT Telling Us About Antibiotics in Livestock Feed?http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/fda-fails-to-disclose-info-on-antibiotics-in-livestock-feed-lands-in-federal-court/
Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:00:02 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=11061The NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) announced earlier this week that they’ve filed a Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit against the FDA claiming that the agency failed to disclose documents that could prove a significant human health risk exists when consuming animal products that contain high levels of antibiotics, which are routinely fed to livestock […]

The NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) announced earlier this week that they’ve filed a Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit against the FDA claiming that the agency failed to disclose documents that could prove a significant human health risk exists when consuming animal products that contain high levels of antibiotics, which are routinely fed to livestock animals.

After failing to disclose the documents requested by the NRDC under the Freedom of Information Act, the non-profit environmental organization filed the lawsuit in federal court in hopes of forcing the FDA to disclose the information.

The NRDC has been a critical voice in the ongoing conversation over the use of antibiotics in livestock feed—and earlier this year the FDA was ordered by a federal court to investigate the overuse of antibiotics. Nearly 70 percent of the antibiotics sold in the U.S. are fed to animals living in factory farms. They’re used mostly as a preventative—to keep animals from developing infections while living in unsanitary conditions where diseases are widespread. And they’re also employed to help the animals grow faster. The excessive use of antibiotics in our food supply has directly correlated with a rise in serious infections and illnesses that can no longer be effectively treated with common antibiotics, leading health care practitioners to rely on stronger medications with more serious human health risks.

Requested by the NRDC are FDA documents that concern scientific reviews on the safety of antibiotics in animal feed, which the organization believes the FDA has information on that would support the organization’s case for decreasing or eliminating antibiotics from animal feed.

]]>Prove They're Safe Or Stop Using Them: Court Orders Major FDA Action on Antibiotics in Livestock Feedhttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/fdaantibiotics-in-livestock-feed/
Wed, 06 Jun 2012 07:00:01 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=11029Intensity over the issue of antibiotic use in animal feed has been heating up over just how much the government should intervene. And a recent ruling by a federal court has crystallized the severity, ordering the FDA to take further action in efforts to protect public health from the repercussions of excessive antibiotic use. The […]

Intensity over the issue of antibiotic use in animal feed has been heating up over just how much the government should intervene. And a recent ruling by a federal court has crystallized the severity, ordering the FDA to take further action in efforts to protect public health from the repercussions of excessive antibiotic use. The overuse of antibiotics has led to a growing number of antibiotic-resistant pathogens and concerns about effective use of the drugs to treat serious human health issues.

According to a statement from the Natural Resources Defense Council, the court wrote of its decision:

“[T]he statutory scheme requires the Agency to ensure the safety and effectiveness of all drugs sold in interstate commerce, and, if an approved drug is not shown to be safe or effective, the Agency must begin withdrawal proceedings. The Agency has forsaken these obligations in the name of a proposed voluntary program, Guidance # 209, and acted contrary to the statutory language.

. . .

[FDA] must evaluate the safety risks of the petitioned drugs and either make the finding that the drugs are not shown to be safe or provide a reasoned explanation as to why the Agency is refusing to make such a finding.”

The decision comes on the heels of a court order in April that will force the FDA to withdraw the approval of the nontherapeutic use of certain antibiotics in animal feed unless there’s conclusive evidence that the drugs are safe. The court’s most recent ruling also included specific instructions that the FDA must reexamine its decision that denied two Citizen Petitions filed on the issue with the FDA in 1999 and 2005.

“As the court points out, FDA has recognized but stopped just short of making formal findings that the nontherapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock production poses a risk to human health,” said NRDC attorney Jen Sorenson in a statement. “By forcing the agency to grapple with the science, the court’s order paves the way for a ban on these dangerous drug uses.”

]]>Agent Orange 2.0? Why Won't The EPA Ban Toxic 2,4-D?http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/agent-orange-2-0-why-wont-the-epa-ban-toxic-24-d/
Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:00:54 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=10908The NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) did not have a good week. After news that the FDA dismissed a federal court ruling that the agency needed to enforce viable options for dealing with antibiotic resistant pathogens resulting from the overuse of antibiotics in livestock feed, word came that the EPA denied the organization’s petition to […]

2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid is one half of the toxic Vietnam War pesticide, Agent Orange, and the most commonly used pesticide in the world. It has been linked with a number of human health issues including cancer and birth defects.

The petition was filed by the NRDC in 2008, but the agency did not make its ruling until this week. Deciding against the organization’s suggested restrictions, the EPA stated, “the data are not sufficient to conclude that there is a cause and effect relationship between exposure to 2,4-D and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.’’

In a statement released by the NRDC, the organization said, “By down-playing the scientific evidence linking this pesticide to health concerns, the EPA shifts toward under-protecting human health. And while the current use of 2,4-D is cause for concern, changes on the horizon in U.S. agriculture are cause for greater alarm.”

Concerns over the EPA’s denial of the NRDC’s petition are heightened by the pending requests for approval by Dow AgroSciences on genetically modified seeds that have been engineered to resist 2,4-D. Genetically modified seeds are most typically engineered to resist glyphosate (marketed by Monsanto as Roundup), but resistance to the chemical by certain plant and animal species has triggered chemical and seed companies to look at stronger chemicals, like 2,4-D, to also be used on GMO crops. The NRDC says the EPA’s dismissal doesn’t bode well for human health, farmers or the environment, “The Agency needs to wake up to the new reality and reevaluate 2,4-D in light of the new expansion in use.”

]]>Outrage Flies Over FDA 'Guidelines' to Control Antibiotic Resistancehttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/outrage-flies-over-fda-guidelines-on-controlling-antibiotic-resistance/
Thu, 12 Apr 2012 07:00:02 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=10906After filing a lawsuit last year aimed at forcing action over excessive antibiotic use in livestock production, the NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) has called the agency’s recommendations an “ineffective response” for dealing with the alarming rise in antibiotic resistance, according to a statement released by the non-profit organization. The FDA announced its final recommendations, […]

After filing a lawsuit last year aimed at forcing action over excessive antibiotic use in livestock production, the NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) has called the agency’s recommendations an “ineffective response” for dealing with the alarming rise in antibiotic resistance, according to a statement released by the non-profit organization.

The FDA announced its final recommendations, called a “guidance” geared towards the livestock industry’s handling of antibiotics used in feed, but the agency has made no requirements of the industry despite the rulings of a federal court that said they must do so. The new guidance is an expanded version of a draft guideline released by the FDA in 2010. The NRDC calls the latest move an “empty gesture” taking no “effective action” on the issue.

Among the recommendations, the agency suggests phasing out antibiotics in production use and designating them more for therapeutic applications instead. Guidelines were also advised for drug manufacturers to require prescription and veterinarian authorization for certain drugs in feed. In a statement, agency commissioner Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg said, “This new strategy will ensure farmers and veterinarians can care for animals while ensuring the medicines people need remain safe and effective.” The NRDC called it a “make-believe solution.”

The World Health Organization also recently addressed the severity of the risks associated with rising antibiotic resistance, suggesting that the “post-antibiotic era” is rapidly approaching, and could lead to senseless deaths from minor infections if not addressed in the immediate future.

More than 29 million pounds of antibiotics were given to livestock in 2010—more than 80 percent of the nation’s supply. Routinely, antibiotics are used in feed to increase animal growth and help to prevent infections resulting from living in such dense and unsanitary conditions. The antibiotics wind up in our food supply and cause antibiotic-resistant pathogens that threaten human health.

]]>Federal Court Rules FDA Must Investigate Antibiotic Overuse in Livestockhttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/breaking-news-fda-must-investigate-antibiotic-overuse-in-livestock-court-orders/
Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:38:34 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=10864With more than 80 percent of the nation’s antibiotic supply now going into feed for animals raised as food, antibiotic-resistant bacteria are rapidly threatening human health, and it’s an issue that can no longer be ignored by the FDA, ruled a federal court judge last night. Finding in favor of the plaintiffs—organizations including the National […]

With more than 80 percent of the nation’s antibiotic supply now going into feed for animals raised as food, antibiotic-resistant bacteria are rapidly threatening human health, and it’s an issue that can no longer be ignored by the FDA, ruled a federal court judge last night.

Finding in favor of the plaintiffs—organizations including the National Resources Defense Council, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Food Animal Concerns Trust and the Union of Concerned Scientists—the judge’s ruling noted that “research has shown that the use of antibiotics in livestock leads to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria that can be–and has been–transferred from animals to humans through direct contact, environmental exposure, and the consumption and handling of contaminated meat and poultry products.” As a result, the FDA must take action and withdraw approval of non-therapeutic uses of antibiotics including penicillin and tetracycline in animal feed unless they are proven to be safe for industrial use. Additionally, the FDA must honor its obligation to conduct hearings on withdrawing the approval of antibiotics now considered overused by the judge’s ruling.

The overwhelming majority of antibiotics used on livestock are given to generally healthy farm animals as a preventative measure against the unsanitary living conditions and close proximity to other animals that can often lead to slow-healing wounds as a result of routine fighting. Antibiotics are also added to feed to promote faster animal growth, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

In a statement released by the NRDC, Jen Sorenson an attorney for the organization said: “Thanks to the Court’s order, drug manufacturers will finally have to do what FDA should have made them do 35 years ago: prove that their drugs are safe for human health, or take them off the market.”

The news comes just days after the World Health Organization issued a harsh warning about the overuse of antibiotics and the development of antibiotic resistant pathogens, suggesting that we’re entering into a ‘post-antibiotic era’ where minor infections such as strep throat or a scraped knee could have the potential to kill its victim.

]]>NRDC Seeing Red Over Agent Orange, Sues EPAhttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/nrdc-seeing-red-over-agent-orange-sues-epa/
Sat, 25 Feb 2012 08:00:22 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=10801On February 23rd, the NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) filed a lawsuit against the EPA seeking to force the government agency to consider a petition aimed at banning a common toxic pesticide ingredient that is best known for its use in Agent Orange. In a statement released by the organization, forty-six million pounds of 2,4-D […]

On February 23rd, the NRDC (National Resources Defense Council) filed a lawsuit against the EPA seeking to force the government agency to consider a petition aimed at banning a common toxic pesticide ingredient that is best known for its use in Agent Orange.

In a statement released by the organization, forty-six million pounds of 2,4-D are used in the U.S. annually, commonly in weed-and-feed type garden products used in school and playground areas, lawns and parks. And agriculturally, it can be found applied to pasture land, wheat, corn, soy, barley, rice, oats, sugar cane and timber.

The organization’s lawsuit comes just as major chemical companies and manufacturers have begun to push for the USDA approval of genetically modified crops resistant to 2,4-D. Glyphosate, an herbicide commonly marketed by Monsanto as Roundup, is used aggressively on genetically modified seeds—mainly corn, soy, canola and cotton. But bugs, like the rootworm and some species of weeds have begun showing resistance to glyphosate, leading chemical and seed companies to engineer 2,4-D resistant seeds, despite the likelihood of resistance cropping up to 2,4-D and other pesticides engineered into resistant seeds.

According to the NRDC, 2,4-D is absorbed through the skin, putting anyone in contact with it at risk of serious health issues connected to the chemical, including cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, cell damage, severe hormonal disruption, reproductive problems and birth defects. In a statement, NRDC senior scientist, Dr. Gina Solomon stated, ” There’s no reason to continue allowing a toxic Agent Orange-ingredient in the places our children play, our families live and our farmers work. EPA must step up and finally put a stop to it.”

]]>FDA Oversight Approved Cancer-Causing Fish Post BP Oil Spillhttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/fda-oversight-approved-cancer-causing-fish-post-bp-oil-spill/
Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:00:21 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=10329A new study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives by researches from the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) includes some shocking information in the wake of the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The research concludes that the FDA underestimated the risk possible from eating seafood where cancer-causing contaminants may have […]

A new study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives by researches from the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) includes some shocking information in the wake of the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The research concludes that the FDA underestimated the risk possible from eating seafood where cancer-causing contaminants may have accumulated.

The Gulf of Mexico is one of the most productive fishing regions in the U.S., and according to the study, became heavily contaminated with the carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) known to accumulate in seafood. The FDA’s level of concern underestimated the severity of the risk, and the agency was overall more lax on scientific standards surrounding the Gulf spill than in the case of the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska in 1989.

Citing the flawed oversight as a failure to incorporate substantial scientific data and putting already vulnerable populations at risk, the NRDC is calling on the FDA to set new safety limits for PAHs in food.

]]>Too Many Antibiotics in Your Meat Lands the FDA in Courthttp://www.organicauthority.com/blog/organic/too-many-antibiotics-in-your-meat-lands-the-fda-in-court/
Fri, 27 May 2011 07:00:35 +0000http://www.organicauthority.com/blog/?p=9325Citing a failure by the FDA to address the link between an overuse of antibiotics in livestock and the rise in antibiotic resistant infections in humans has led to a lawsuit filed against the agency by several environmental and animal interest groups. The National Resource Defense Council (NRDC), Center for Science in the Public Interest […]

Citing a failure by the FDA to address the link between an overuse of antibiotics in livestock and the rise in antibiotic resistant infections in humans has led to a lawsuit filed against the agency by several environmental and animal interest groups.

The National Resource Defense Council (NRDC), Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), Food Animal Concerns Trust (FACT), Public Citizen and Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) formed a coalition suit in hopes to compel the FDA to support the withdrawal of non-therapeutic uses of the widely administered penicillin and tetracycline in animal feed.

Nearly 70 percent of all antibiotic use in this country goes to livestock as a part of their daily diet as a preventative measure necessary for animals forced to live in cramped and unsanitary conditions. The high levels of antibiotics contaminating food result in antibiotic resistant infections among humans, particularly children and the elderly. Peter Lehner, NRDC executive director said, “Accumulating evidence shows that antibiotics are becoming less effective, while our grocery store meat is increasingly laden with drug-resistant bacteria.”

Currently, there are no label regulations for alerting consumers to whether or not their meat and dairy products are contaminated with antibiotics (but USDA certified organic foods by law can contain no antibiotics). Lehner said that, “The FDA needs to put the American people first by ensuring that antibiotics continue to serve their primary purpose — saving human lives by combating disease.”

A recent study revealed alarming numbers of antibiotic resistant pathogens found in supermarket and restaurant meat samples, indicating that the risk of infection comes not only from the reduced immunity from eating meat raised on antibiotics, but the products themselves are now breeding grounds for antibiotic resistant infections.